..,,.,„ „„, ,„; Mil | | || I) 

011898 469 9 M 



REMARKS 



OF 



HON. E, F. STOCKTON, 



OF 



NEW JERSEY, 



UPON 



NON-INTERYENTIOW. 



DELIVERED 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 



FEBRUARY 2, 1852. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED BY JNO. T. TOWERS 

1852. 



.,- 



REMARKS 



OF 

o HON. R. F. STOCKTON, 

OF NEW JERSEY, 



UPON 



NON-INTERVENTION. 



DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FBBRUARY 2, 1852. 

Mr. President : I hold in my hand a series of resolutions 
passed by the Legislature of the State of New Jersey, and 
which by their authority have been transmitted to me. I ask 
that they may be read and printed. 

The Secretary read the resolutions, as follows : 

Joint Resolutions in relation to Governor Kossuth and the doctrine of national 

non-intervention. 
Whereas Louis Kossuth, Governor of Hungary, exiled from his country because 

he made a gallant but unsuccessful struggle for his country's rights, has come to 

the United States, an invited guest of the nation — 

1. Be it resolved by the Seriate and General Assembly of the State of New 
Jersey, That Louis Kossuth be invited to visit this Legislature at its present ses- 
sion, that we may extend to him the hospitality of the State, and assure him of our 
sympathy. 

2. Be it resolved. That in Louis Kossuth we recognize a true patriot, and the 
able and eloquent expounder of constitutional rights and liberties; that we sympa- 
thize with him and his countrymen in the calamities which have befallen their father- 
land; that we deeply deplore that the recent glorious struggle for the freedom of 
Hungary was rendered unsuccessful by the treason of their general, and the armed 
intervention of Russia, contrary to the principles of justice and international law; 
and that we trust, by the blessings of Divine Providence, that all his future efforts 
in the cause of his country may be crowned with success, and that the people of 
Hungary, now dispersed or down-trodden, may be restored to freedom and happi- 
ness, under the protecting care of a constitutional government, erected by themselves. 

3. And be it resolved, That every nation has a right to alter, modify, abolish, 
or adopt its own form of government, and regulate its own internal affairs, and that 
an armed intervention of any other nation to control or destroy this right is an in- 
fraction of international law. 

4. And be it resolved, That the supremacy of the non-intervention law, acknowl- 
edged by all nations, would tend to maintain national rights, prevent national wars, 
and give a lasting peace to the world. 



5. And he it resolved, That our Senators and Representatives in Congress be 
requested to obtain the passage of a resolution by Congress, instructing the repre- 
sentatives of the United States to the Governments of Europe to urge upon those 
Governments a declaration that the forcible intervention of one nation to regulate 
the internal affairs, or to alter, modify, abolish, or prescribe the form of government 
of another nation, is an infraction of the law of nations. 

6. And be it resolved, That the Governor be requested to transmit a copy of 
these resolutions to the President of the United States, to Louis Kossuth, and to 
each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress. 

Mr. Stockton. Mr. Piesident, no one need doubt my re- 
gard for the old Democratic principle, that the representative 
is bound by the will of his constituents. No one need doubt 
the profound respect which any expression of opinion by the 
Legislature of New Jersey will command from me. I know 
no higher honor than faithfully to represent my native State. 
I can enjoy no higher satisfaction than to feel that I merit her 
approval. My ambition in the discharge of my duties here, 
is to promote her interests. In doing that, I know that I shall 
promote the welfare of our whole country. 

Sir, I execrate the oppressors of poor Hungary, and cordi- 
ally sympathize with the Legislature and people of New Jer- 
sey in her sufferings. I am as desirous for her independence 
and the extension of human liberty as any of my fellow citi- 
zens. Nevertheless, I am constrained to say, that while I 
agree to every sentiment of freedom and love of liberty con- 
tained in the resolutions which you have just heard read, I do 
not entirely concur in the principles of public law by which 
the object they have in view is sought to be obtained. I will, 
therefore, with the Senate's leave, proceed to state, in a few 
brief remarks, the grounds of my opinion— what, in my judg- 
ment, are the responsibilities of this Government, and the 
course we ought to take in regard to our foreign relations.. 
The course suggested by the resolutions is not precisely the 
one preferred by me. They do not avow the principles which 
this Government ought to assert and maintain— which the 
United States always has asserted, and which I hope she will 
continue to assert as long as there is a single despotic Gov- 
ernment existing whose people rise to demand the blessings 
of liberty. 

Sir, when we cast our eyes over the world— every where- 
with the exception of America— we see the surface of the 



whole earth appropriated by absolute monarchs. The only 
country which enjoys Republican Government, and whose 
people adequately appreciate free institutions, is the United 
States. Those free institutions comprehend all that survives 
of free principles and political liberty. In them is concentra- 
ted all that is valuable of what man has ever achieved in 
qualifying himself for self government. 

The Mosaic Republic — Rome and her Empire — the transi- 
tory Commonwealths of Italy and Germany, which heralded 
the revival of learning — all stand as beacon-lights to warn 
and instruct us. All that is of value in the institutions of the 
Great Alfred or modern Britain is ours — improved, perfected, 
and divested of every element which can interfere with, or 
enfeeble the sovereignty of the people. We are, in truth, the 
residuary legatees of all that the blood and treasure of man- 
kind, expended for four thousand years, have accomplished in 
the cause of human freedom. In our hands alone is the pre- 
cious deposit. Before God and the world, we are responsible 
for this legacy. Not for our own benefit only, but for the 
benefit and happiness of the whole family of man. What 
course, then, shall this Government take to perpetuate our 
liberties and to diffuse our free institutions over the world? 

1st. We must guard our constitutional grant of delegated 
power from infraction. We must abide within the limits pre- 
scribed by the States to the General Government. We must 
discreetly exercise the powers actually granted, and abstain 
from the exercise of all powers not granted. 

2d. We must so direct the foreign affairs of this Govern- 
ment, that the progress of liberty shall be promoted and not 
retarded. This progress may not be promoted by war except 
under peculiar circumstances. Peace, as I said upon a for- 
mer occasion, is the true policy of this Republic. " Peace is 
the animating genius of our institutions ;" and, indeed, ought 
to be of all nations. 

But the whole world, wherever you look, with the excep- 
tion of a portion of this continent, being under monarchal 
governments, I desire to know how the oppressed and fettered 
nations of the earth are to break their chains, and maintain 
themselves against the armies of despotism, if the law of na- 
tions reads that there shall be no intervention in their behalf? 



I cannot give my consent to any proclamation of principles > 
which maybe construed to abridge the right and sacred duty 
which belongs to this Government, to do whatever it may 
choose to do in aid of any people who are striving to throw 
off the yoke of despotism. 

But, Mr. President, there are, in my judgment, two extremes, 
which should be avoided in the conduct of our foreign rela- 
tions. 1st. We should not recklessly interfere with the affairs 
of foreign nations. We should count the cost, weigh well the 
duty and necessity, and be sure that our objects are practica- 
ble and attainable, consistent with the principles of our Gov- 
ernment and promotive of human liberty and happiness. 
Washington, and the master spirits of that age of great men, 
knew well, that in the infancy of this Government, we were 
not able to cope with the European beligerents who had given 
us such just cause of ofFence. But he foresaw the period 
when this Republic would be able, not only to protect itself, 
but to stand forth as one of the greatest Powers of the earth. 
He foresaw, likewise, that our mission was not compatible 
with any entangling alliances with other nations. He there- 
fore admonished us to avoid all such connexion. Notwith- 
standing, sir, the able and ingenious manner in which the in- 
vitation has been given, that we should entangle ourselves in 
a coalition with Great Britain to dictate this new law of non- 
intervention to all nations, I am, so far as it respects this over- 
ture, for abiding by the advice of Washington— I want no 
entangling alliances. 

2d. The other extreme which we should avoid, and into 
which so many are desirous that we should rush headlong- 
without a glance to the future, is, that forgetting all our ob- 
ligations and duties to the cause of humanity, and to the 
principles of universal freedom, we should, from unworthy 
fears or a false conservatism, hastily decide that we have no 
concern in the condition of the world beyond our own boun- 
daries ; and precipitately resolve, that in no event and under 
no circumstances shall we interfere in behalf of oppressed 
nations. 

I cannot consent to yield and abandon this natural right, 
which all nations from time immemorial have exercised. Sir, 
I say that intervention, not for the purpose of helping an odi- 



ous tyrant to put down liberty—because that is against the 
laws of God and man— but in behalf of " an oppressed peo- 
ple who implore assistance;' is not only in conformity with 
the universal practice of nations, but it is sustained and incul- 
cated by the best authorities on public law. 

Vatel says : 

" But if the prince attacking the fundamental law, gives his subjects a legal 
right to resist him— if tyranny becoming insupportable, obliges the nation to rise 
in their defence, every foreign power has a right to succor an oppressed people who 
implore their assistance." 

Again, the same author says : 

^ " For when a people from good reasons take up arms against an oppressor, jus- 
tice and generosity require that brave men should be assisted m defence of their 
liberties. Whenever., therefore, a civil war is kindled in a State, foreign powers 
may assist that party which appears to them to have justice on its side. He who 
assists an odious tyrant— he who declares for an unjust and rebellious people, of- 
fends against his duty." 

So much for the law ; now as to the practice. 
Mr. Wheaton says, in his history of the " Modern law of 
Nations :" 

"The first war of the French Revolution originated in the application, by the 
allied Powers, of the principle of armed intervention to the internal affairs of 
France, for the purpose of checking the progress of her revolutionary principles 
and the extension of her military power. That this was the avowed motive of the 
Powers allied in the Continental war of 1792 will be apparent from the examina- 
tion of historical documents." 

He says again : 

" That the measures adopted by Austria, Russia, and Prussia, at the Congress 
of Troppau and of Laybach, in respect to the Neapolitan revolution of 1820, were 
founded on principles adapted to give the great Powers of the European continent 
a perpetual pretext for interfering in the internal concerns of its different States." 

Mr. Wheaton, speaking of that period of time between the 
peace of Westphalia (1648) and that of Utrecht, of 1813, 

says : 

" Whatever disputes might arise as to its [intervention] application, the principle 
itself was acknowledged on all hands." 

Sir, I well know that the opponents of intervention are in 
the habit of relying on isolated passages from writers on the 
law of nations in support of this doctrine. But it will be 
found, on a thorough examination of those writers, that all 
they mean to say is, that no nation has a right to interfere 
with the domestic concerns or the municipal institutions of 
foreign countries, or to stir up to rebellion, their citizens or 



6 

subjects. But they all agree to the right to intervene when 
a people have actually risen and are striving to throw off in- 
tolerable oppression. 

It is my deliberate opinion, sir, that we not only have the right, 
but that it would be our duty, under some circumstances, in 
our own good time, when the occasion is proper, and it may 
be practicable, to assist any people who rise to achieve their 
liberties and to establish a republican government. Sir, it 
has been practiced by all nations from time immemorial ; and 
all the paper promulgations which will ever be made will 
never stop this practice among nations. The only way in 
which it can be arrested, is by appealing to their interest and 
safety — by boldly declaring that we will interfere whenever 
it suits us. Sir, what law will they or do they consult except 
the law of their own will ? You cannot chain up the great 
powers of the earth by paper declarations of the law of na- 
tions. The law of nations in modern times, as well as of old, 
is the law of the strongest. This we experienced to our loss 
and sorrow for many years, during which our commerce was 
plundered by Great Britain and France, and for which re- 
dress has been vainly sought up to this time by our suffering 
fellow-citizens. 

It is true, indeed, that nations have generally exercised this 
right for the purposes of oppression and injustice, and in hos- 
tility to the rights of mankind. But a better time is coming, 
when the United States may interpose against the oppressor 
and in favor of the oppressed. 

Therefore, I am unwilling, after tyranny has so long had 
sway, and lorded it over the destinies of mankind, now to 
avow a principle which leaves to its tender mercies the hap- 
piness of the whole human race. 

Sir, an avowal by us of the principle of non-intervention 
would raise a wall around this Republic, as high as hea- 
ven, and would shut in the light of liberty from surrounding 
nations. The avowal of such a principle at this time would 
be received with one universal shout of joy by all the poten- 
tates of Europe, and with one universal wail of lamentation 
and woe by all true lovers of freedom on earth. I am unwil- 
ling to gratify the despots of the world by any such proclama- 
tion. What hope would remain to the oppressed after such a 



declaration? The radiant light which, emanating from this 
Republic, has so long cheered and animated their hearts would 
shine no longer — all would look black and cheerless, and des- 
pair would settle darkly on their prospects. 

Besides, would not the establishment of the principle of 
non-intervention as the law of nations, be in direct opposition 
to the principles declared by Mr. Monroe in relation to this 
continent ? Does any one doubt, that if this country felt it- 
self bound, under no circumstances and at no time, to inter- 
fere with the affairs of Europe, that before many years mo- 
narchical governments would be established in the whole 
Southern portion of this continent ? Does any one doubt that, 
before many years, the Island of Cuba would be a dependency 
of Great Britain ? It is, then, palpable that while peace 
is the policy of this country, and while we should al- 
ways bear in mind the admonition of Washington against 
entangling alliances, that it would be suicidal to the honor, to 
the interests and prospective power of this Government, if the 
United States should incur any obligation by which they 
would forever be forbidden from interfering in the affairs of 
other nations whenever circumstances in any case might ren- 
der it necessary, just, and expedient. Therefore it seems to 
me that this principle of non-intervention would be in direct 
violation of all the rights and duties of a free and indepen- 
dent republic. 

Now, sir, in the practical application of these principles to 
the important topic of the day, I will take hold of that idea 
which others seem to have handled with such significant deli- 
cacy. I am not afraid to express my opinions on this subject, 
or, indeed, on any other, although the press (which, God knows, 
is 'brave enough) seem to shrink from touching it ; and I say, 
for one, that I am not prepared to go to war with Russia on 
account of Hungary, partly because Russia is our old, and 
true, and faithful friend, and party because Hungarian liberty, 
through the instrumentality of the United States, is at present 
an idea Utopian and impracticable. This proposition is self- 
evident, and requires no demonstration ; it is an impossible 
thing, and what is impossible can't be, never comes to 
pass.' But, Mr. President, though I am not prepared, nor wil- 
ling to go to war with Russia, or to disturb the present state 



8 

of things in Hungary, about which we have so little satisfac- 
tory information, I will once more repeat, and declare it in 
the face of the world, as my opinion, that this Government 
has an indisputable and perfect right to interfere whenever, 
by such interference, she can promote her own interests and 
advance the cause of liberty — whenever, by such interference, 
she may successfully rescue from the grasp of tyranny an op- 
pressed nation, whom she may see fit to assist and to place 
among the independent nations of the world. This is a prin- 
ciple which we cannot, we dare not, we never will relinquish. 
It is an inherent principle of nationality, under no pretence 
whatever to be surrendered. 

Sir, if tyrants have used it heretofore to enthrall mankind, 
this growing Republic will, some of these days, use it for their 
freedom. In peace let it be maintained with unfaltering te- 
nacity ; in war let it be asserted by all the power of arms ; 
and when the great contest begins, as before 1900 it must, be- 
tween free principles and the right of self-government and 
despotic power, then let it be inscribed upon all our banners — 
everywhere — wherever they float, on every sea, and land, and 
ocean, and continent, where the warfare rages, let it herald 
the advent of freedom and national independence, and the dis- 
comfiture of tyranny and oppression. 

I move that the resolutions be laid upon the table, and print- 
ed for the use of the Senate. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011 898 469 9 



